Wednesday, December 27, 2006

I am shocked and amazed when I saw Sami's "concerts" on youtube. When I see Muslims, men and women, screaming and waving as if they are in a U2 concert, it is indeed a scary sight. Wearing hijabs while engaging in this behavior is not only unIslamic but also wierd. Sami Yusuf responded to this with an open letter to Yvonne, suggesting that he doesn't agree with some of the behaviors but how could he be responsible for that? Well, dah... when you dress, act, sing like a rockstar, what do you expect teenage girls to do? Their parents want them away from the U2s, and now you are the 'halal' alternative. Yet, this is exactly the deception of Shaytan. Haram in the name of Islam, making it just a little easier for the parents to swallow. Same concept as what many "halal lenders" do when giving out loans, changing names and terms, and making it all soooo halal. So, a shout out to all the Muslim fans of Sami Yusuf: I know many of you listen to other music as well, or you used to. And I cannot say that this is not better (because at least the wordings are not obscene), but there is no doubt that this is haram too. So, DON'T fool yourself. If you want to listen to Sami, know it is wrong, have the guilt, so that Allah may one day remove you from the listening of Shaytan's tools, and instead fill your heart with Quran. May Allah guide Sami, Yusuf Islam, and all other "Muslim popstars" to see the deception of Shaytan's ways

The link to the following article is bad, so I had to find it in the google cache:

Pop Culture in the Name of IslamYVONNE RIDLEY in Muslim WeeklyMonday, April 24, 2006

I FEEL very uncomfortable about the pop culture which is growing around some so-called Nasheed artists. Of course I use the term ‘Nasheed artists' very lightly. Islamic ‘boy bands' and Muslim ‘popsters' would probably be more appropriate.

Eminent scholars throughout history have often opined that music is haram, and I don't recall reading anything about the Sahaba whooping it up to the sound of music. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for people letting off steam, but in a dignified manner and one which is appropriate to their surroundings.

The reason I am expressing concern is that just a few days ago at a venue in Central London, sisters went wild in the aisles as some form of pop-mania swept through the concert venue. And I'm not just talking about silly, little girls who don't know any better; I am talking about sisters in their 20's, 30's and 40's, who squealed, shouted, swayed and danced. Even the security guys who looked more like pipe cleaners than bulldozers were left looking dazed and confused as they tried to stop hijabi sisters from standing on their chairs. Of course the stage groupies did not help at all as they waved and encouraged the largely female Muslim crowd to "get up and sing along." (They're called ‘Fluffers' in lap-dancing circles!)

The source of all this adulation was British-born Sami Yusuf, who is so proud of his claret-colored passport that he wants us all to wave the Union Jacks. I'm amazed he didn't encourage his fans to sing "Land of Hope and Glory." Brother Sami asked his audience to cheer if they were proud to be British ,and when they responded loudly, he said he couldn't hear them and asked them to cheer again.

How can anyone be proud to be British? Britain is the third most hated country in the world. The Union Jack is drenched in the blood of our brothers and sisters across Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine. Our history is steeped in the blood of colonialism, rooted in slavery, brutality, torture, and oppression. And we haven't had a decent game of soccer since we lifted the World Cup in 1966.

Apparently Sami also said one of the selling points of Brand UK was having Muslims in the Metropolitan Police Force! Astafur'Allah! Dude, these are the same cops who have a shoot-to-kill policy and would have gunned down a Muslim last year if they could tell the difference between a Bangladeshi and a Brazilian. This is the same police force that has raided more than 3000 Muslim homes in Britain since 9/11. What sort of life is there on Planet Sami, I wonder? If he is so proud to be British, why is he living in the great Middle Eastern democracy of Egypt?

Apparently the sort of hysteria Sami helped encourage is also in America, and if it is happening on both sides of the Atlantic, then it must be creeping around the globe and poisoning the masses. Islamic boy bands like 786 and Mecca 2 Medina are also the subject of the sort of female adulation you expect to see on American Pop Idol or the X-Factor. Surely Islamic events should be promoting restrained and more sedate behavior.

Do we blame the out-of-control sisters? Or do we blame the organizers for allowing this sort of excessive behavior which demeans Islam? Or do we blame the artists themselves?

Abu Ali and Abu Abdul Malik, struggling for their Deen, would certainly not try to whip up this sort of hysteria. Neither would the anonymous heroic Nasheed artists who sing for freedom; check out Idhrib Ya Asad Fallujah, and you will know exactly what I mean.

Fallujah is now synonymous with the sort of heroic resistance that elevated the Palestinians of Jenin to the ranks of the resistance written about in the Paris Communeand the Siege of Leningrad. The US military has banned the playing of any Nasheeds about Fallujah because of the power and the passion it evokes.

If those Nasheeds had sisters running in the streets whooping and dancing, however, the Nasheeds may be encouraged because of haram activity surrounding them.

Quite frankly, I really don't know how anyone in the Ummah can really let go and scream and shout with joy at pleasure domes when there is so much brutality and suffering going on in the world today. The rivers of blood flow freely from the veins of our brothers and sisters from across the Muslim world. Screaming and shouting the names of musical heroes drown out the screams coming from the dungeons of Uzbekistan where brothers and sisters are boiled alive in vats of water. How many will jump up and down and wave their arms in the air, shouting wildly for justice for our kin in Kashmir, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Palestine, and Iraq? There are many more killing fields as well across the Asian and Arab world. Will you climb on theater chairs and express your rage over GuantanamoBay and other gulags where our brothers and sisters are being tortured, raped, sodomized, beaten, and burned? Or will you just switch off this concerned sister and switch on to the likes of Sami Yusuf because he can sell you a pipe dream with his soothing words and melodic voice?

Oh, Muslims, wake up! The Ummah is not bleeding; it is hemorrhaging.

Listen not to what is haram. Listen to the pain of your global family.

88 comments:

One of the things i've found quite remarkable about Yvonne Ridley is how quickly she has got her bearings right as a (relatively) new Muslim. Not only are her comments about the "Islamic pop scene" spot on but also her comments on the global war on terror and the effect its having on Muslims at an individual level.

Wow, I must say I am amazed at this article. It pretty much sums up how I have been feeling about this recent "phenomenon" of Islamic music.Too bad this article won't get too much attention, I think a little music and singing in the background of the article would do the trick.

Kashif-- you are correct about Yvonne getting her bearings right... I just hope she keeps them there. You know Yusuf Islam started out right too, and then some of our 'moderate' friends made music halal, and the rest is historyI do find one thing interesting. Those who claim to be the 'traditionalist', or madhab-following stricklers (which I might add I don't have a problem with) somehow ignore the Imams in this issue, and instead we hear names of Ibn Hazm, and I think I even heard Shawkani once in justification of music.Now, Ibn Hazm and Qaradawi (another one used for justification) consider themselves mujtahids, and don't follow madhabs for sure, so I am interested in finding out how the traditions of the 4 imams are thrown out, and music deemed acceptable. Some of the more extreme sufis who claim a strict madhab following, also use music... so in all sincerity, I want to know from any of the music-defenders how they align the opinion of the madahib with music?Yes, this info. is probably quite old... Oh, I forgot to mention Lotaenterprises blog where I found this info.

I remember one shaikh quoting a saying "whoever follows the leniencies of scholars gathers within himself all evil."

Meaning that if you look hard enough you'll find some great scholar somewhere in history who will say that something is halal when the majority say the opposite. And thats because even great scholars make mistakes. Thus, if you follow the mistakes of the scholars (pick and choose of course) you gather within yourself all evil.

Assalam u aliakum,This letter upset me; we are muslims fighting within ourselves, kind of like international civil war.

MUSIC is controversial in Islam. Look at all of the other singers, too. Even the ones in your own country. We can't keep to old traditions. Islam can and will be flexible to different eras. There is nothing that says music is haram. If you aren't proud of the country you're born in, what will you be proud of? Hamza Yusuf says to be good, proud citizens of your country. Every country has its faults. So, according to Yvonne's philosophy, you can't be proud of anything or any country. Even muslim ones.

Someone once said, "When a nonmuslim says,"Islam was spread by the sword", what does the muslim do? He pulls out his sword and says,"You wanna bet?!""

Keeping this in mind, we must learn to respect others' opinions. Islam flourished and spread, became into an empire when we were open to others.

Music is not "controversial", it is haram. Just like Riba or interest is haram. It is interesting how everything we don't want to do or want to do becomes "controversial". Insurance is controversial, hijab is controversial... and mark my words, in not a very long time, you'll hear people saying that alcohol is controversial, dating is controversial, etc. How can it be controversial when the majority of scholars, including all the Imams have said it is haram? What makes anything then non-controversial? Because I assure you that you will find a strange opinion on every matter that you could think of.

There is no civil war or infighting. Muslims have to defend their religions from innovations and disobedience to Allah. If tomorrow, a group starts preaching that it is ok to drink beer (not wine, just beer), would we sit back and say that in the interest of "unity" we should let that go. I know alcohol is worse than music, but just like you can find opinions that music is ok, you can ACTUALLY find opinions that certain alcohols are okay too. Look at Imam Abu Hanifa's opinion on the alcohol that is made from other than grapes, dates or barley. He actually considered it permissible for use for 'energy' and medicine.

So, read what Ibn Alhydrabadee said in the comment before yours. Don't despair, the people of truth are always few, but Allah will preserve them.

Regarding music and different scholars differing on that, I would like to ask a simple question? Who would you like to follow more? Allah and His Messenger salAllahu alayhi wassalam or a 'scholar'? Allah mentions in the Qur'an how the Jews and Christians took their priests and rabbis as their protectors other than Allah, going against what Allah said, and this is actually equal to shirk, according to a sahih hadith of RasulAllah salAllahu alayhi wassalam.

Anyway, if you follow Rasul Allah salAllahu alayhi wassalam, then you will know that he said music is forbidden. Look at the following hadith; I see no gray areas:

Narrated Abu 'Amir or Abu Malik Al-Ash'ari: that he heard the Prophet saying, "From among my followers there will be some people who will consider illegal sexual intercourse, the wearing of silk, the drinking of alcoholic drinks and the use of musical instruments, as lawful. And there will be some people who will stay near the side of a mountain and in the evening their shepherd will come to them with their sheep and ask them for something, but they will say to him, 'Return to us tomorrow.' Allah will destroy them during the night and will let the mountain fall on them, and He will transform the rest of them into monkeys and pigs and they will remain so till the Day of Resurrection." (Book #69, Hadith #494v)

Oh, you gave it! Thanks for clearing that up. Sorry for clearing that up. You know, I always thought how could Abu Reem be Abu Houston and in Delaware? Are they brothers??? LOL sorry for confusing you guys! I corrected my blog now!!!

I had written one small article after reading Yvonne Ridley's speech http://aymenn.wordpress.com/2006/11/13/music-haraam-or-halaal/

MashAllah u've written it much better than I did.It is also said that on the day of judgement "Dhajjal" will come playing music,and the ones who listened to music would follow him.Once again,superb article.Very strongly written and may Allah bless you.

That's interesting about sunniforum (sufi-leaning) saying music is haram... since you find many sufis openly enjoying it... in fact, see this blog by a guy called Yursil, who sets up his ode to his Sheikh on some guitar rhythms. Is this unanimous among the sufis? I mean what about the big concerts after RIS? I didn't see anyone expressing any dislike for it?Link here; Beware Shirki stuff :)

The majority of the music on my website is not 'guitar rhythms' rather, what you hear is the traditional Middle Easter oud.

An instrument which has been part of Islamic culture for centuries. Of course, as most Muslims know little about the history of Muslims and the Caliphs after about the third or fourth Caliph till until right about, well... now, it is no surprise that few are aware of it.

The issue of music is hardly as cut and dry as haraam and halaal, anymore than speech itself could be entirely be declared haraam and halaal.

Both are noises which simply send vibrations in the air. The question is what meaning people can take from them and what it ends up promoting.

As far as reconciling the position of the madhabs, there is no ijma on this issue within the madhabs. There are many classifications of opinions, and on this topic there is no ijma, but a jahmur opinion of music being haraam.

Yursil, do you honestly believe that the Prophet (SAW) used to sing and dance?Shirk, fornication, stealing, lying, etc... these all have been part of islamic history from the 4th caliph up until...now. The fact that Muslims have been doing something for centuries doesn't serve as a justifaction to do a certain act.What do you achieve from listening to music? Does it increase your knowledge or taqwa better then listening to verses of the Qur'an? Or is it a mere waste of time, or as refered to in the Qur'an as "Lahw al-hadith" (Surah Luqman).May Allah forgive all of us, and guide us all.

Assalamu AlaykumFirst off all I want to say is many scholars have been debating the haram halal issue over music. Saying that somehing is halal or haram is not our job. We could be almost sure something is halal but in the end its haram. You see I remember there was this hadith about the prophet playing daff and he enters the house and sayida aisha says isn't music prohibtied and he said today is Eid. I'm not very sure but this was the story the hadith was saying NOT THE HADITH ITSELF. What I'm trying to say is Islam is a lenient religion. Why do we people have to make it sound soo extreme. i'm not saying that the muslim sisters' reactio was right but what these singers are doing is better than nay of us will do. Critisize them when you do somehting for islam and do dawa on there level. Please we must respect each other no matter what our faults are.

As I am a follower of the traditional schools, I understand things in a greater context than simply what the Prophet (Sallahu'alaihewassalam) did and did not do.

As I indicated, there is no consensus on this issue, from the time of Imam Ghazali (R), Hujjat ul islam, who indicated that Music, when it leads people to spiritual feelings are commendable.

It is also a known fact that people did celebrate with music around the Prophet (S) and he never stopped people from singing songs, in fact, he was welcomed to Medina with children singing (and certainly he did not compose the lyrics).

The question is slightly idiotic as the Prophet (Sallahu'alaiheewassalam) also did not listen to the many nasheeds we have today, without instruments, and yet most Salafi/Wahabists don't have a problem with those.

Regardless, I find this blog post amusing, the comments more amusing. Those who have little understanding think that with 1400 years of disconnection they can suddenly mimic the Prophet (S).

I didn't say anything regarding Sami Yusuf specifically or what goes on at his events . I disagree with his approach personally, and I feel that it is another way that Muslims are imitating the West.

Rather, we should look back and realize how we traditionally understood music, how often it was played, under what circumstances it was played, and what was permitted.

But then again, most Muslims feel that 'conferences' and 'halaqas' where the blind lead the blind are the best approach to learning Islam, and they find no 'innovation' in a yearly mimicry of Western conferences.

Yursil, I am glad the blog is amusing you. For most extreme sufis, the whole world is nothing but lahw and amusement.

As for your following "traditional schools", would that be the sufi traditions passed along in dreams? Because we know that all the 4 Imams did not approve of music. You can read for yourself here, unless you are afraid to read the truth from 'salafi/wahabis' or basically anyone who wishes to follow the real traditions, not the dreamed-up ones.

Also, it seems that you need a brushing-up on what innovations or "bidah" means. Here is an another article that you probably wont read. It refers to bidah in religion, which you are very well-aware of, I am sure. Included are dhikr-circles, mawlid, and many of the other acts that are conveniently referred to as 'bidah-hasanah'. Again, I am sure you know all this, but I find your references to the mimicry of Western conferences as being some sort of bidah/innovation quite lame. Doesn't reflect very well on your "traditional" knowledge, or any knowledge at all.

Finally, your little quirk about "Those who have little understanding think that with 1400 years of disconnection they can suddenly mimic the Prophet (S)."

At least, we try. We follow the way of the Prophet, and the way of the Imams as well. We just don't claim the traditional methods, we follow it. That is why you won't find one of the followers of Sunnah singing about His sheikh on a guitar... you won't find the following verses that we find on your blog:"Oh my Shaykh SultanWhen you say “Allah (SWT)!” the Arsh (Throne) shakesThe saints come and gatherYou are my,You are my,You are myShaykh Sultan"

And this is something the Prophet would have approved of? Having Allah's Throne shake because of some sufi shaikh living in a New York "Dargah"?? Astaghfirullah... this is why the path of "bidah-hasanahs" leads to the path of dalalah.

I would also like to ask Mujahideen Ryder and other sufi-leaners, where you do all draw the line for "extreme sufis". I keep hearing that Hamza/Zaid and others are "moderates"; while Kabbani for instance is extreme... what about the braelwis? would you consider someone like Yursil extreme? So, please define for me at which point the "moderate sufis" stop, and "extreme sufis" start at?

"As for your following "traditional schools", would that be the sufi traditions passed along in dreams?"

No, my dear brother. It is quite clear what I meant and referenced was the four madhabs, which are broader than the works of the four Imams themselves.

Of course, the view of the four imams on this issue is not necessarily well defined as the issue is whether categorization (as you believe is possible for things such as linguistic or nonlingusitic meanings of Bida al Hasana) of Music is something to be considered.

Again, there is no ijma opinion on this subject, rather, there is a majority (jahmur) opinion. A salafi obviously has troubles living in a reality where there are multiple opinions, so I see why you are not able to respond to that.

I'm not sure what exactly you found 'lame', and how that led you to discuss my level of knowledge.

But you are right, indeed, I know very little.

Regardless, the western style religious conferences that Muslims have adopted into a yearly practice are an interesting innovation indeed. I don't think they are necessarily a good one, as they have caused us to abandon traditional methods of learning for popular weekend seminars, Sunday schools, and 'retreats' all of which are simply copies of the Christians.

Rather it would be better if we spent time trying to understand how our Muslim forefathers who carried Islam to us taught Islam, how they lived Islam, rather than thinking we can figure it out with a Bukhari search engine.

As far as the verses of that song, alhamdulillah these are verses taken actually from various parts of existing and ancient poetry.

Anyway, I wonder what would be your reaction to those Sahabi children who welcomed our Nabi (Sallalhu'alaiheewassalam) with shirky verses of the famous Tala`a al-Badru `Alayna.

Of course, if you Arabic you would know the popular song which children sung for the Prophet (Sallahu'alaiheewassalm) had verses such as:

You are a sun, you are a full moon,You are light upon light,You are the quintessence of existence,You are the lamp in every breast

So we are left with wondering, is music forbidden, when the Sahabi came up with beautiful songs such as the above?

Nay, the issue is specific.. over instruments, and as I mentioned, there is no consensus on this issue.

Of course, the famous Qasida Burda which has a rich history of its own would probably trigger all your shirk registers, but regardless the Muslim ulema loved it and distributed it widely with approval and affection.

The expression of the throne shaking is not one of literal belief, as it is the Salafis who are literalists... for us rather, it is only is as much literal as the Sahabi believed the Prophet (Sallahu'alaiheewassalam) was really a sun or moon.

Rather it is an expression of reverence and authority of his message, which is simply that of the Prophet (SAllahu'alaiheewassalam) and in the style of the Prophet (Sallahu'alaiheewassalam) and Ottoman shaykhs of time past.

Yursil, so do all you sufis have a guideline of when to take something literally or not, or do you just pick and choose according to your whims and desires?Are you actually listening to yourself speak? You can't just bend and shape this deen according to your desires by following all the weak opinions of scholars.I swear by Allah that Allah's throne doesn't shake when Sheikh Sultan says Allah, neither physically or metaphorically.

Chishtis, Shadhilis, Naqshabandi Mujaddidis (don't even do group dhikr only silent dhikr) all forbid music.

the only thing they let slide is probably the duff or the tabla, but not even that.

the naqshabandi haqqani sufis take a different stance then many other sufis. if you want to learn about what the haqqanis believe, then you can just ask bro. Yursil. (what i personally think about them is said below)

Regarding these Muslim concerts. As a member of Young Muslims (www.ymsite.com) and on my MSA E-Board (www.stonybrookmsa.com), I can proudly say that Muslim concerts has helped many young Muslim brothers and sisters (especially sisters) to stop listening to straight up 100% haram music (MTV, BET, etc.).

Sami Yusuf is the Justin Timberlake of young Muslims. (it's a good and bad thing)

Now I don't know if you guys know this, but I'd say 60% of the Muslim youth today go to concerts with hip hop and pop stars at least once or more a year.

In fact in my university alone, the majority of the Muslim youth are clubbin and hittin up concerts.

Any young Muslim today, without Islam, live off of music. Music becomes there lifestyle. Anything the artist does, wears, eats, drives, lives, speaks, dresses, his/her girl's choice, etc. becomes part of them. If you ever been to sunday school or even a RIS/ICNA/ISNA/TDC/MAS conference, just look at how the 13-15 year olds act and talk. Wallahi this is a serious problem for all Muslims whether wasabi, non-wasabi, sufi, non-sufi. These same young people who live off of there music they listen to, come to listen to Sami Yusuf, Native Deen, Ahmed Bukhtair, Muhammad al Husayn, Raihan, 786 Boys, Mesut Kurtis, Yusuf Islam, Noor, A'shiq al Rasul, Iman, and others (Yeah I'm a nasheed fanatic, haha). They listen to something that has the 'hot beat' just like Justin Timberlake or 50 cent but the lyrics are completely different.

For many people it's hard to get rid of music in there life right away, so nasheeds have become an alternative for many confused young Muslims. It acts as a bridge from the haram to the halal.

It's like smoking. When your addicted to smoking you can't just stop right away. You have to take it slowly. Smoke 5 packs a week, then 4 packs, then 3 packs, then 2 packs, then 1, then inshaAllah none. Smoking the 5,4,3,2,1 packs is still haram, but it's slowly decreasing and eventually you'll stop.

Same with music. Music has become a drug. It's an addiction. Even for me after 4-5 years without music, if I hear an old school beat from say Dr. Dre or Biggie, it's over. Those lyrics fly thru my head and I can spit it all exactly. So once I fully recover from this music addiction, then I won't need to listen to nasheeds (the not so halal ones). I can just listen to the straight up halal ones (no difference of opinion nasheeds).

Now regarding how these Muslim concerts are organized and the way the audience reacts, it's wrong. Very wrong. But what can you do when many of these young Muslims who act the way act are doing the same like they would any concert.

At the 2006 RIS Concert, when Noor, Hamza Robertson, A'ashiq al Rasul, and Nazeel Azami went up, all the audience did was clap, and takbirs. When Ehab Tawfiq and Outlanidish came on, forget about it. Look at the difference. Ehab Tawfiq isn't even a nasheed artist. He just recently left mainstream Arabic pop music and came to sing Islamic songs. Outlandish is a mainstream band. They are signed to Sony BMG. They get packed stadiusm full of non-Muslims. There latest album is the first lyrical halal album. Most nasheed artists don' get the screaming and yelling like these guys do.

Regarding what Yvonne Ridley wrote about Sami Yusuf. Sami Yusuf, wallahi, is the most humble popular nasheed artist I have seen. THE GUY JUST STANDS ON STAGE AND SINGS. He doesn't even say "Come on guys, put ya hands up" or "come on clap with me". Nothing like that. I've been to 2 of his concerts, one in Canada at RIS and one in New Jersey and the Islamic Releif fundraiser and Sami Yusuf really sucks at entertaining the audience in terms of talking to them and hyping them up. But mashaAllah the brother has an amazing voice.

786 boys - yeah i don't like them too. so i agree with yvonne with them.

Back to sufis and music. I didn't see any student of any scholars of tasawwuf at the concert (students who have given bai'yah to a shaykh).

In fact, most sufi shaykhs prohibit attendending gatherings like that.

Amad and co. you guys should learn about the naqshabandi mujadidis, chishtis and shadhilis. They are probably the strictest type of sufis out there. I personally say the naqshabandi mujadidis are the salafis of sufis. hahaha.

naqshabandi mujadidi - www.tasawwuf.org

chishti - www.khanqah.com

shadhili - www.shadhiliteachings.com/

oh yeah, there is a big difference between the naqshabandi mujadidis and the naqshabandi haqqanis.

as i said earlier the naqshabandi haqqanis are very different from the rest of the sufi's. my personal opinion on the haqqanis are that they are extreme sufis.

Lastly, I want to say that many Muslims (parents, elders) condemn Muslim artists but when Shah Rukh Khan is in a new movie, it's a family night. Bollywood is disgusting and more haram then Hollywood. I'd rather have my children watch Hollywood than Bollywood. It's that bad. Sadly (amongst the desi Muslim community), Salman Khan is okay, but Native Deen is not (cuz they black).

Wow I feel I just wrote a post on my blog.

By the way Amad, You should know that I'm a former wasabi, former jihadi wasabi, and I am really really (like best friends) with many wasabi and AlMaghrib brothers AND sisters (i keep it halal :-D ). So when I say things about wasabis, it's all out of love.

Naqshbandi's of all type do loud zikr including the mujaddadi, who simply do not use a dhol during it.

In fact, even Deobandi Naqhsbandi's perform loud zikr known as the Khatm e Khwajagan as listed here:

http://www.darululoom-deoband.com/english/introulema/muftis1.htm

Where it says (and I quote exactly):==================================="Khatm-e Khwajagan" ("The Seal of the Masters") is one of the famous practices of the Naqshbandi order. This was recited every day regularly after the Fajr prayer in Mufti Sahib's Mosque (which is known as Chhoti Masjid in Deoband).===================================

Frankly bro, after meeting you and Br. Salman I am flabbergasted you would say we are 'extreme sufis'.

Yursil, why don't you take up your argument with MR off the board. I kept hearing that we have to differentiate between 'moderate' and 'extremes' in sufis, so I wanted to know where to draw the line. It seems to me that line is extremely fuzzy.

May Allah protect us from all these complicated tareeqas. The Deen was not meant to be so complicated. Follow Allah by praising him Alone, and follow the Prophet's Sunnah through a faqeeh, to the best of your abilities. Do what he (S) did or his sahaba did, AVOID what he (S) and the sahabas didn't. I don't think any of the Sahabas or the first generations had any tareeqas, did they? Was Imam Bukhari on any Tareeqas, was Abu Hanifah, how about Ibn Qayyim? Wallahualam, but it seems that spirituality can be gained without the need for more labels; the salaf did it, we can and should follow their example.

We can spend our limited time learning about all the Tareeqas, or we can spend it learning about so many of the things that we know not enough of; like how to increase khushoo in prayer, how to deal with our parents, etc. Or even contemporary topics like how to refute the people who want to link Islam with terrorism, etc.

Yursil, Singing we can say isn't haram, but having musical instruments is. Tala al badru Alayna doesn't have any verses saying your are the moon, you are the sun, either you are making that up, or there is a fabricated sufi version out there. I am still very concerned about you thinking that the throne of Allah shaking when your teacher says Allah, both literally and metaphorically.

MR, I know plenty of youth who when told of the haramness of music, stopped cold turkey. Just find a really good recitor of Quran and throw away all of your haram cd's and you shouldn't have a problem after that. Take the sahaba for example when told that alcohol was haram, they stopped cold turkey. Some threw the cups the had in there hands to the ground.

Amad, keeping it simple is fine. If it works for you it works for you. Many of us have understood that along with books and sciences of Hadith and tafsirs, classifications of transmitters and interpreters, we have developed sciences which are not necessarily 'simple' yet necessary.

Anonymous, verses of the song are freely available and those verses have been widely distributed.

Is all singing allowed? No, really only singing that falls in line with the Shariat. If those verses are not a part of your 'version' of Tala al badru Alayna, then certainly you at least know that the title of Tala al Badru Alayna is referencing the Prophet (S) as the moon.

Again, there is a large opinion of scholars ,including Imam Ghazali (R) who believed instruments for the purposes of adding to good lyrics and uplifting things would be allowed.

As far as what I said about the verses of that song.. I already indicated it wasn't literal. And as far as metaphorical, its meaning is that when Shaykh says "Allah!" it is profound and meaningful and with authority.

Yursil, oh the white moon rose over us..., that doesn't say you are the moon, you are the sun.As far as following the minority, and the weakest of the scholars opinons, this goes back to the discussion at the beginning of the blog.Just because you are trying to say something metaphorically doesn't make it permissible. I could say that Allah cries when my shaykh says his name, do you think that is permissible even if I meant it metaphorically??? To add insult to injury you sing it over a guitar!And did you say that we can't mimic the Prophet (SAW) because he lived 1400 years ago!!! May Allah guide all of the sufis to the correct Aqeedah of the Prophet (saw). May Allah guide us all. Ameen.

Obviously you have reading comprehension problems so I don't think I need your help in understanding metaphors.

Furthermore the throne shaking is a well established expression, including that mentioned in hadith. Of course, as you have little knowledge besides what your teenage years have exposed you to it is quite clear why you continue to make "throne shaking" an issue.

Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 6033:Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying while the bier of Sa'd b. Mu'adh was placed before them: The Throne of the most Gracious shook at the death of Sa'd b. Mu'adh.

As far as what I said about 1400 years ago and imitating the Prophet(S). The point was that you cannot pick up a book and pretend to think you can instantly imitate the Prophet (S) with 1400 years of disconnection.

Yursil, don't you find an incredible amount of difference between what the Prophet (S) said from Wahy (revelation), versus your musings on the guitar?? Yaani, if the Prophet said, he got that from Allah, and we believe in the literal shaking, because there is nothing to say otherwise. How does that compare to someone just dreaming it up or ramdonly saying it? Just like anon said, can I just say Allah laughed because of x, y, z... even if metaphorically? Let's be careful about EXCESSIVE praise, this is exactly the kind of excess that introduced polytheism to mankind.

No, I don't find an incredible amount of difference. Literal shaking of the Throne (which brings us back to the very issues of difference between Salafi's and Ashari Sunnis) is really beyond the point. Whether it was from Wahy or not, is again not relevant.

Just as it does not say it is a metaphor, it does not say that it came from Wahy or was a metaphor or that it was literal, or that it was a forbidden expression for anyone else to use either.

Rather, what we know is the Prophet (S) said it, and others have used it similarly in poetry that developed in the time of the Tabayeen and onwards.

Making that an issue is simply exposing ignorance to our rich poetic legacy.

As far as defining excessive praise, we have very different lines for that. As 'excessive' is a word which means different things to different people. For me, any Praise that is clearly outside of the Shariat is excessive, everything else is not.

And for the life of me I cannot find where it is in the Shariat that we cannot take and apply such metaphors, especially when they are grounded in Sunnat.

As far as Allah's laughing or crying, we find that is likening Allah to creation and therefore outside of the Sharia according do our understanding of Aqida.

Having a vague line of 'excessiveness' on the other hand that you can fit and choose to apply.. and then subsequently condemn Sufi's is convenient, but it offers little substance in actual jurisprudence and definitions.

Alhadmulillah, as long as we stay within mainstream Sharia and Aqida opinions, which are all accepted to each other as -valid- opinions, then we should be able to continue and work together.

Yursil, The simple fact that your comments are arrogant and condescending take some basic manners away from this debate, and really show that your shuyookh dont teach ikhlaaq (good character).

"Obviously you have reading comprehension problems"Was that really neccesary? Is this what your shuyookh say to you when you comprehend something differently?

"as you have little knowledge besides what your teenage years have exposed..."teenage years? little knowledge? What is your basis for saying any of that?

"It is ok, unlike Salafi's we don't go around condemning and killing anyone who doesn't follow our exact opinion on every issue"My teachers and I have never killed anyone. Maybe this is another one of your metaphorically speaking excuses.

"As far as what I said about 1400 years ago and imitating the Prophet(S). The point was that you cannot pick up a book and pretend to think you can instantly imitate the Prophet (S) with 1400 years of disconnection.

This is why you need a teacher and a guide."

I totally agree, this is a common point that sufis make when arguing with salafis, but salafis dont just pick up a book like you said.

"we follow an opinion of Scholars on instruments, whether it be a minority or not"One of the weaker opinions among a few of the sahaba was that intercourse was permissible through the anal passage, I guess it would be okay for me to follow that opinon then too.

Yursil, so what your saying is that you don't actually believe that the throne shakes when the Prophet (saw) says it does, it is just a phrase that was used back then?Also, http://www.duas.org/zilhajj/prayer_of_tawaf.htmis any of this authentic?

Speaking the truth may seem arrogant for sure, especially to those on a forum where speaking truth means you get called extremist and speaker of shirk.

My shaykh may say much worse things about my reading comprehension to me, that is really none of your business.

I really have nothing else say to your post, your complaints about the Throne lyrics have been proven to be baseless, and really the rest of your comments about adaab carry no weight, especially from someone who has yet to say salaam on this thread to anyone and uses an anonymous name.

To all anonymous posters: I would appreciate if you would use a name, even if a kuniya or a nick. That would make discussion a lot more easier to navigate. Simply choose the Other identity, and use any name, you don't have to be registered.

Yursil, Allah DOES indeed laugh, as narrated by His Messenger. But His Laugh is not anything like his creation. Do you believe that Allah Sees and Hears? If yes, that's exactly the inconsistency in your Aqeedah. Because we hear and see as well. But our hearing and seeing is not like His (Subhana wa ta'ala). Brush up on the Aqeedah primer that I posted.

Again, there is a HUGE difference between Wahy, as found in Quran or Hadith, and what you can say. We don't ascribe to the throne, Allah's mighty creation, anything except what He says. And to compare about what was said about the Prophet, to what is being said about a sheikh in New York, give me a break!! Regardless, it is excessive praise, one that is not sanctioned in our deen. Do you find any of the Sahaba or the Tabiyeen or Tabe-tabiyeen using such phrases for the ulema of their time? If yes, please provide the reference and the source. If not, then sticking to the path of those 3 generations is the SAFEST approach, by any standard.

Yursil, you continue to use a harsh tone. Do you honestly feel that your better than me?

"...have been proven to be baseless." Proven by who? Is this your way of conceding defeat?

You are the only person posting here to represent the sufis, and you really are giving them a worse name then what they already have. If you really feel that you are calling to the truth, then you have a very lousy way of calling to it."Call to the way of Allah with wisdom, and good speech..."It seems that you are calling to the sufi way with arrogance and bad manners.

"MR, I know plenty of youth who when told of the haramness of music, stopped cold turkey. Just find a really good recitor of Quran and throw away all of your haram cd's and you shouldn't have a problem after that. Take the sahaba for example when told that alcohol was haram, they stopped cold turkey. Some threw the cups the had in there hands to the ground."

so does everyone and there momma. but i bet u half of them still go back and listen sometimes. or turn on the radio sometimes when they driving

I find this picture from Yursil's blog very interesting... click here... forming a train to get barakah from the NY Sheikh... And see more pictures on Yursil's blog by clicking here.. They tell a lot about what goes on in this Dargah.

So, Yursil, which one of the 4 Imams did group dhikr with Syrian guitars and drums. And while you are at it, please point me to any of the Imams or even one of the major scholars accepted by all (such as Nawawi, Ibn Hajr, etc.) who got in a group, put hands on each other, all the way to the Shaikh? Is this another 'bidah-hasanah' of yours, an act that is for the pleasure of Allah, yet somehow it escaped the Prophet, the companions and the first generations, only to be discovered by a Sufi saint hundreds of years later... It does make me wonder if all this is bidah-hasanah, then what remains of a bidah-dalalah?? Of course, you may not choose to answer, because you really can't have a good answer. But I appreciate your blog, I really do. It gives me an opportunity to expose extreme sufis, which I know you did not appreciate, is a testimony of other pseudo-sufis.

Yursil, you are trying to grab at straws now. Al-Maghrib's courses being 'bidah-hasanah', are you kidding me? Do you even know the difference between linguistic bidah and bidah in Ibadah. For your own good, please see this article on bidah, where Imam Al-`Izz ibn `Abdus-Salam includes classifying sciences as an obligatory innovation, and institutes of Islamic learning would fit nicely in this category: -Obligatory innovation, such as combining and classifying Arabic sciences and teaching them.

And thanks for the additional humorous stuff. Unintended blood spot on the foreheads mysteriously fashioned into Allah. Was that a karamah or was it done by the human hand? It would be more appealing if it happened by itself, please say it was so? Any more interesting tidbits from the trip to magical kingdom up in NY? Did the Sheikh walk on water for everyone or levitate lying down? Also, is this one of the Sufi Sheikhs who actually prays 5 times, or is it one of those whose prayers are done at Makkah by their souls? Thanks in advance for responding.

Shaykh prays every obligatory prayer and every sunnat, every day and that is what he teaches us as well.

As for the rest of your mockery, keep it coming.

Classifying Bidaa because some Shaykh is telling you that their bidaa is a-ok, but somehow the bidaa of sufis is not a-ok eh?

I believe 'enrollment' by signing papers and joining a 'seminar' or 'program' or 'Bachelor of Arts in Islamic Science' and naming false Qabeelahs and other tactics are just the exact same equivalent to an initiation into a tariqat.

What makes one Bida Hasanat and the other not? Because salafi's say so? I think not.

Yursil, I have a strange feeling you didn't read the article that was posted.Also, for the sake of argument, let's say that Almaghrib is bidah (which it isn't), does that make all of your bidahs correct?

I'm simply asking what makes Al-Maghrib practices and techniques (mostly copied from the West, with a bit of Qabeelah added) somehow legitimate and under the 'necessary' category while 'enrollment'/ Bayat in the Sufi tariqas not?

If it is up to the Salafi's to decide what is 'necessary' alhamdulillah, well I don't think I need to say anything further.

Yes, If Al-Maghrib bidaa is correct then Sufi Tariqa enrollment is correct as well.

First of all I apologize for the mocking... I think I got carried away by the incredulous 'Allah written in blood' thing. But I hope you do understand that many of the things I mentioned have been linked with Sufis. I am also glad that your Sheikh prays 5 times with the Sunnah.

Secondly, the article that I references was from islamonline, not your "salafi" website. It quotes the great Imams, not any contemporary scholars. Do you know Sheikh Al-`Izz ibn `Abdus-Salam? He was one of the great scholars of the 7th century; by the way, one of Hamza Yusuf's CD set is based on his works. So, you should consider what was said in it carefully.

I continue to find the analogy to AlMaghrib amusing. There is no bayah there, the Qabeelah are purely for competitive purposes; there is no absolutely no established loyalty to one or the other. No one makes you sign or swear a statement to be loyal to one Qabeelah. On the other hand, the bayah is an Islamic tradition, it is an act of Ibadah, and it requires your allegiance to a person, disobedience to whom will cause you to be sinful. It’s childish to even compare the two; I don't think that many of your more knowledgeable Sufi friends would even entertain the analogy either. Instead, they will probably insist on the Islamic necessity of a bayah-- a talking-point for you. Which we of course disagree with.

I think part of the problem is that certain groups think differently of traditional Sufi practices.

I don't think that Bayat is necessary, and nor do I consider it an act of ibadaat.

It is what it is... an oath of allegiance and promise to study the sciences of tassawuf/ character development under the tutelage of a shaykh.

A commitment and a form of a contract. It was given in war time and traditionally we adapted it also for studying certain sciences.

It is important in the sciences of Tariqa as the Shaykh will often hit students nafs pretty hard with the truth about themselves.

Anyone can walk away from a Bayat, especially when faced with such harsh criticism from thei shaykh... but at least if they walk away they realize they backed out on something of a personal commitment they made.

I think Yvonne is no more than a new convert...converted into extremism or there is a possibility that she can be a spy to create division among Muslims. remember that Mr. Hempher was the Brit spy who brought in the 'Wahabi' cult. This does NOT mean that all converts are spies, but some are not too hard to notice....especially the ones with 'extreme' ideologies.

If she had any sense in her blank head she would recal the story of Yusuf (AS) and how women cut their fingers when they saw his beauty...MashaAllah. Is the blame on Yusuf (AS)? No! That was an example. If she is afraid that her nafs cannot handle certain things then she had no right to attend such an event and then leave and slander the performers and the audience.

With regards to the LOCAL Al Maghrib in my area...I see no difference between them and Wahabis. They think it is ok to follow their 'teachers' but not ok to follow the Holy Imams of Ahle Sunnah. Talk about Hypocrisy! InshaAllah their hypocrisy will be revealed as Allah Almighty has promise that his 'LIGHT' will not be extinguished.Allahu Akbar

> Jazak Allah Khairun! Your work is much appreciated> and very valuable.> I have a question, which is more about principles than rulings.>> It is well know that Imam Malik disapproved of musical instruments> (other than a particular drum listed in the GH.)

First of all, we should realize that we live in a time in which musicvia instruments has become omnipresent. If you live in Americafor instance, you will be faced with music in almost every part ofyour public life (e.g., when you go to buy your necessities, atschool/college, while in a waiting-room/lounge, while riding abus, train, or a plane, etc.).

You will note that the strict ruling for music given in Guiding Helper(and it is definitely one of the strictest given by the scholars of thepast) is listed in the Book for the Path to Allah. The reason whywe narrated this strict opinion even though we full-well knew thatit would be difficult for most Westerners to follow is that it is directedto those travelling the Path. This is because those travelling the Pathto Allah must realize a few basic things in order to make progress:

a) They are not even close to being perfect. When they are faced with a ruling such as this which they can't seem to apply to their lives even after strenuous attempts, they will realize their imperfection sooner and be less likely to consider themselves "pure" and "good". b) Good deeds are good because Allah has commanded them and are bad deeds are bad because Allah has forbidden against them. For example, most people alive today would not consider listening/playing musical instruments to be something for which one earns bad deeds even though most traditional Islamic scholars have at least spoken about most of them in a negative light. In other words, the person travelling the Path must realize that intrinsically speaking all acts are equal - and it is only Allah's arbitrary assigning of rewards and punishments to certain acts that gives them spiritual weight. The real reason why something is makruh or haram is not that it is intrinsically in and by itself wrong or leads to harmful consequences. Rather, Allah has tied negative effects to acts labeled as haram as a further deterrent and as a mercy from Him. For example, He has tied painful headaches (a.k.a. hangovers) to getting drunk and has tied STDs (sexually transmitted diseases) to promiscuity. c) In order for the person travelling the Path to proceed fast, he must make continuous tawbah (repentance). Applying this strict ruling to his life will give him ample opportunity to repeatedly repent and return to Allah.

With all that said and done, we would say that there are dispensationsavailable for the common man not travelling the Path within the MalikiSchool of Jurisprudence.

The dispensations available within the Maliki school follow (each letteris a separate dispensation and the latter ones are easier than the formerones):

a) The common may "overhear" music that he has no part in composing or playing. However, he may not actively listen to, compose, or play instrumental music that consists of wind, percussion, string, or horned instruments. [For example in this dispensation, he may not play a musical CD/tape nor play a piano keyboard.] b) The common man may actively listen to instrumental music but may not himself play wind, percussion, string, or horned instruments. [For example in this dispensation, he may play a musical CD/tape but may not play a piano keyboard.] c) The common man may actively listen to instrumental music. He may also play musical instruments, but only if he does this once in a while and does not take playing musical instruments up as an occupation or a habitual exercise. If he takes playing musical instruments up as an occupation or a daily exercise, there is agreement in the Maliki school that his playing the instrument is unlawful.

The popular opinion in the Maliki school of course is what wehave listed in the Guiding Helper Explanatory Notes. However,those that find difficulty with that opinion may follow opinion(b) above [that is our recommendation]. Our recommendationfor them is that they however try their best to minimize theamount of time listening to such music and search for moreproductive or internally meditative exercises to engage in.

References:

Here is a translated quote from the explanation of the Murshid byMuhammad ibn Ahmad Mayyarah that contains these threedispensations and also the popular opinion:

"Listening to musical instruments is a general prohibition for both men and women. Now if each gender is prohibited from listening to musical instruments when not with the opposite sex, then it is even more [prohibited] when the genders are gathered together...."

"Now if [the player] has taken up musical instruments as a profession or is constantly returning to them, there is no difference in the Maliki school that it is unlawful.... and there is disagreement about the person who plays musical instruments not as a profession and only once in a while. Some Maliki scholars say that it is still unlawful while others say it is mubah...."

"Imam Malik's view is that listening to any and all musical instruments is unlawful except the one-sided tambourine (daff) in a wedding and the long drum (kibar); however, there is disagreement about the long drum [and other drums]. And likewise is treated playing them, selling them, and buying them..."

"However, some Maliki scholars have said that it is permissible to listen to musical instruments."

> There is also a text> I've seen where someone asked Imam Malik what to do if they heard> the Flute while they were out. He recommends they leave if they can,> if not just to finish their business.>> I also once read that Imam Malik had learned music as a child, but> then his mother pushed him to study deen.

No comment. You yourself seem to understand or have knowledge ofthese texts.

> Now, my question is not so much about music, as I have heard> many sides, and understand the dominant opinion (ie no strings and> winds etc.) However my question is this: If Islam was established in> Medina, (and elsewhere) and instruments were actually Haram (as> opposed to disapproved of as distractions from more important duties> as Ibn Khaldun I think felt) why would they be openly used?

The fact of the matter is that the prohibition on music was not as clearlylaid down by the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) or theearly scholars in Madinah as, for instance, the prohibition on wine andgambling. This is why the issue of Music will never be properly resolvedon the whole by the scholars of our din unlike the issue for eating porkfor instance.

Ibn `Ajibah writes in his explanation of al-Mabahith al-Asliyah:

"This issue [of musical instruments] is one of [much] disagreement as no clear primary text has come from the Legislator - and all affairs are mubah by default until a [clear] prohibition is found. And [the fact of the matter is that] listening to musical instruments was not declared unlawful until the idle [wrong-doing] folk took it up and linked it with drinking wine and fornicating...

[It has been narrated that] a scholar (who condoned [certain] musical instruments) in the presence of Caliph Harun Rashid said, 'I attended a wedding feast in Madinah in which the scholars attended. [There were so many singers at this wedding] that if the house were to collapse, no singer would remain in Madinah. And the smallest of the [condoning] scholars present was Imam Malik ibn Anas. So, they sang [and a man] had a mizhar [i.e. a musical instrument (probably a tambourine)]; so, they sang [with it] and uttered nasheeds."

Now in the above excerpt, other Maliki scholars could have interpretedmizhar as applying to other than a tambourine.

> i.e. If the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) covered his ears when> he heard the Shepard's flute (I think this is in Ghazali's 'letter to a boy')> and Malik's students were to get up when they heard the flute, it implies two> things (to this ignorant man writing to you):> 1) continued usage of the flute during and after the Prophet's (peace and> blessings of Allah be upon him) time in lands where Islam was established.> 2) disapproval for some to hear it and not others.

Yes. What you say above has been said by authentic scholars.

> If #2 is the case, it seems that Haram would not be a suitable term,> since Haram is not just for some to follow and not others (unless we> presume the shepard and the other flute player were non-muslim, which> would still I assume necessitate that they play privately, and we would> need proof that this was the case.)

The logic is o.k.; but, the *popular* opinion in the Maliki school still labelsit explicitly as "haram" even after the advanced vocabulary of the Jurists haddeveloped. [Refer to the first quote above].

Now if you are confused about what this word mash-hur/popularactually means, a brief explanation is listed in the addendum to thisletter.

> So, are we in fact discussing something forbiden by a command,> or are we discussing a thing strongly recommended against because> of an implied action and statement from the Prophet (peace and> blessings of Allah be upon him,) who's actual ruling on the matter> was ambiguous (as in Abu Baker's thinking that 'Aisha and the girls> playing Daff were sinning, when in fact the Prophet (peace and> blessings of Allah be upon him) was present)?

Before the advanced vocabulary of the jurists developed, this wasa big issue. In the early centuries of Islam (e.g., first two centuries),people would say that something is mamnu` (prohibited) withoutqualifying whether this was just a recommendation to leave it ora strict prohibition. Even al-Mudawwanah al-Kubrah has this problemof ambiguity in certain places; it was the task of the later scholars(mostly Ibn Rushd (not the philosopher)) to straighten things outso that such ambiguities would cease to be an issue. And they statedin the case of musical instruments that the popular opinion was thatthey are unlawful to play or listen to (you can refer to the excerptabove or other trusted Maliki sources.

> Are there any rukhsas or minority opions from the Maliki jurists?

Three dispensations are listed above. For the common man that findsdifficulty with the opinion in the Guiding Helper, we would recommenddispensation (b).

> Thank you very much for your time, and May Allah reward you> for your efforts. I love the book!!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------> The Notes of Sources discusses the disagreement amongst the 'Ulama with> regards to music (cf. notes to GH 42:1755). Bearing in mind the hadith quoted> in the Primary Proof section, in support of Imam Malik's position, how have> the Maliki 'Ulama who have permitted musical instruments explained hadith like> that mentioned and other hadith, such as:>> "This Community will experience the swallowing up of some people by the earth,> metamorphosis of some into animals, and being rained upon with stones."> Someone asked, "When will this be, O Messenger of Allah?" and he said, "When> songstresses and musical instruments appear and wine is held to be lawful.">> "There will be peoples of my Community who will hold fornication, silk, wine,> and musical intruments to be lawful..." (both hadiths taken from the Shafi'i,> Ibn Hajar Haytami, as translated in Reliance of the Traveller, pg. 775)

The explanation given is that almost all of these hadith mention multipleunlawful acts performed together with music and not only music. For example,the hadith you quote mentions fornication, silk, and wine while others alsomention idol worship, etc.

You can refer to al-Qardawi's al-Halal wa l-Haram fi l-Islam about thistopic since he has narrated many minority Maliki opinions throughout hisbook and he has listed the rationale for such minority Maliki opinions.

> Q2. Does the Maliki School permit women to sing for strange men if the lyrics> are not lewd and the manner not similar to bedroom voices; such as 'religious'> songs (qasaa'id) or just other inspirational songs with lyrics, for example,> about honour and courage, etc? (this is a query regarding explanatory note> 2628)

The popular opinion in the Maliki school does not allow men to listen tounrelated adult women's "singing" voices (e.g., popular song or qasa'id).However, the popular opinion allows men to listen to conversational tonevoices of unrelated women. We have narrated the popular opinion in theMaliki school in footnote 2628 of the Explanatory Notes.

There are minority opinions which would allow singing women's voicesas long as the voices are not purposely "seductive" (e.g., in a qasa'id)and are closer to the conversational tone.

As for "seductive" and "sensual" singing carried out by adult females,there is no disagreement among our scholars (inside and outside theMaliki school) that such is unlawful to listen to by unrelated men whoare not the spouses of such singing women - as it is recorded in manyauthentic hadith that the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace)prohibited female singing girls.

[As a side note, one of the reasons why a minority opinion is called a "minority" opinion is that the evidences for it are generally weaker than that of a popular opinion.]

Reference(s): [QF: volume 1: page(s) 370: line(s) 8: {book 21, chapter 6, 12th prohibited act of the tongue, 4 types of unlawful singing}] [KH: volume 1: page(s) : line(s) M17-27: {formal prayer, loudness in recitation for women, `adawi's explanation of whether or not women's voices are part of their "nakedness", explanation of Sidi Khalil's words "And loudness the minimum of which is that he makes oneself hear and the one next to one hear..."}]